The president accepted his Nobel Peace Prize last week on the grounds that in some case it is necessary to go to war to preserve the peace, a nice act of philosophical jujitsu that, had it been tried by George W. Bush, would have met with charges of sinister doublespeak. But Barack Obama’s undeserved award, coming as it did when the country he leads is mired in two “hot” conflicts in the Middle East and a protracted “cold” one against the ideology of jihad, was only further scandalized by the fact that December 10 is Human Rights Day — the anniversary of the signing of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, which has served for over half a century as modernity’s most comprehensive, most translated, and most ignored covenant on civilization. That this doctrine has been consistently flouted and scorned by world tyrannies is the fault of no one commander in chief, and yet, just a year into his term in office, Obama has already proved a busted flush on human rights from China to Sudan to Iran.

In October, the Dalai Lama — who ought to rightly be seen as a greater political dissident than “spiritual leader” — was given the first Lantos Human Rights Prize, named for the late Rep. Tom Lantos of California, who first invited the Dalai Lama to Congress in 1987. The expectation was that the most prominent voice for Tibetan independence would be granted an audience with the leader of the free world. Ah, but Obama’s trip to China was forthcoming and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had already sowed the Nixonian field by publicly declaring that Chinese human rights were secondary to global economic considerations. So lest Communist recrimination interfere with American realpolitik, His Holiness was asked to wait it out a spell until bilateral relations faded from the headlines.

The Dalai Lama said he took no offense at the snub, but his special envoy, Lodi Gyaltsen Gyari, noted disdainfully that the deferred meeting indicated a “new approach on Tibet by the U.S. administration.” This was like saying that Gerald Ford’s rescinding a White House invitation to Alexander Solzhenitsyn in 1975 out of fear of offending Brezhnev indicated a new approach on anti-totalitarianism by the U.S. To add insult to injury, there was every reason to believe that China could handle human rights criticism and negotiate trade and debt policies at the same time. Vaclav Havel recently toldForeign Policy magazine that when he was elected the first president of the Czech Republic and two days later invited the Dalai Lama to visit, Beijing followed the gesture not with belligerence but with damage control. China dispatched its minister of foreign affairs to Prague to give its own brief on the necessity of colonialism. “This was unbelievable!” said Havel. “Why did they feel the need to explain their point of view to the leader of such a small nation? Because they respect it when someone is standing his ground, when someone is not afraid of them. When someone soils his pants prematurely, then they do not respect you more for it.”

14 Comments, 14 Threads

1.
BattleofthePyramids

No surprise here. Obama is a man of the Left. Leftists and Liberals have always, without exception, supported the worst tyrants and human-rights violators as long as they can perceive some benefit to themselves by doing so. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Sandanistas, Kaddafi, Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, Al Qaida, the Mullahs of Iran – all have their defenders and supporters on the left. There is literally nothing whatsoever that Leftists will not support as long as it bashes the US and they can benefit.

Interesting piece. There are things about Obama that are really puzzling me when I spend some time pondering his reaction to Ft Hood, amongst other things. I hate it that the Ft Hood episode has virtually been thrown under the bus. To me this is bothersome. It seems to me he could show a bit more interest in a satisfying result and some truth instead of all this PC blarney. It bothers me that it seems like the US is not showing enough solidarity for the protesters in Iran, meaning these folks are trying for some human rights. Obama doesn’t have to go into some huge discourse about it, he could simply say our thoughts and prayers are with you. Sure it’s sappy, but at least it’s something. I do not get why he got the Nobel prize. Sometimes I don’t get why whoever won an Oscar or Grammy either.

And note what Obama did with Honduras, siding with Zelaya, who was violating the Honduran Constitution, its legislature and its supreme court.

And what about in the US, where Obama was insisting that Congress pass bills without reading or debating them (eg, the stimulus) thus rendering the voice of the people (Congress) irrelevant.

Obama is a pathological narcissist. He has no interest in anyone whom he cannot control, people must be focused on and in a state of adulation, of Obama. This explains his insults to foreign leaders of the West who are focused on their own country, not Obama.

If you are not an ardent follower of Obama, then for Obama, you simply don’t exist. The demonstrators in Iran weren’t focused on Obama but on democracy and freedom. Obama was therefore not interested in them.

Obama can only accept adulation; he can’t accept criticism, and will either become insulting (Limbaugh, Hannity, FOX, the Tea Parties, the Town Halls) or will simply deny your existence..and your right to exist.

We need a new Constitutional amendment….that only Americans can be elected president. Oh….with an adjective: only ADULT Americans can be elected. If only he were an adult. If only he were an American at heart. Oh, well. Our bad.

You’re forgetting the unforgivable move of Obama getting his stooge in the UN side with the OIC to happy-stamp the banning freedom of conscience on religion and the right to speak your mind on the matter. In doing so, he drove a knife in the back of every free thinker living under the rule of a whichdoctor (or any thug who wants to hide behind a witchdoctor if it makes it possible to shut down the opposition — you know, the divine right of kings, tyrants and presidents for life and all that sanctimonious jazz).

President Obama supports dictators and tyrants everywhere and rejects democracies, e.g., he supports Vladimir Putin in Russia but opposes Poland and the Czech Republic, he attacks Honduras and is friendly to Hugo Chavez. His return of the bust of Winston Churchill when he met with the Prime Minister of the U.K. shows that he opposes Churchill and would have supported Nazi Germany in World War II. His present snubbing of the U.K. but friendliness to China shows his views.

What the President says he intends to do and what he intends to do are two different things. He is in a perpetual campaign mood, saying whatever he thinks at the moment is appropriate from his personal point of view. Everything he says is ad hoc. It has no relation with the truth.

The more powerful organizations and people become, the more they realize how much they must compromise to protect their power. The Dalai Lama, Pope, Presidents and Prime Ministers and others know the truth when it comes to what they enjoy. They know the price and gladly pay it. Its only those, like us, at the bottom rungs that cling to our orphaned idealism like a young mother when it comes to real values. Only because we have no power gives us that gives the right to judge from high. Do those in power care if we do? I dont think so…they are much to busy basking in their own glory.

Michael Weiss: listen to me simpleton, look around your house hold and see many god damn items you own that is made in China? when you stop buying them then spew out your hatred toward Obama.

300,000 killed and 2 million displaced? no kidding Dick Tracey I thouhgt this all went down on President Bush’s watch did it not? and What did he do? I dont’t remmeber him sending our mighty Air Force to bomb the hell out of them… so stop your bull s…
Green Revolution: you are so god damn offensive and dumb to that matter.. I have not seen a site like this with hatred of muslims and you included.. all of a sudden you care for Muslims? or are just trying to do our president in? look simpleton: I am from Iran and 8 years of confrontation by Bush as you can see did jack!!! I was out in the sreet during the 1979 revolution and I know the Iranian people like the back of my hand.. what Obama is doing is the perfect strategy. By him willing to talk to those a…holes he has created a huge rift in the Iranian leader ship I just got back from there… The last thing the Iranian people now is meddeling by a sitting US president now who that is, Obama or Bush… The Iranian leadership is going to say ” see we told you so. it is the Americans”. and that the last thing our brave people need. they will be crushed to a point of no return. also simpleton: where did you go to school or did you not? why do you think the movement in Iran is not moving as fast as any likes it to move? if you give me the right answer I will then know you have some level of education.. for now shut the f…. up and stay out of foreign policy

You miss the point. All politics is personal. Progressives are not in power to to change them, they’re in power to change us. See, for example, this AP story:
SAN FRANCISCO – After suffering 10 years of horrific abuse at the hands of her husband, Rody Alvarado fled her native Guatemala in 1995 and applied for asylum in the U.S.
Last week, in a one-page decision, an immigration judge finally granted her request. It was the culmination of a long personal odyssey for Alvarado and of a thorny legal case that inflamed passions on both sides of the immigration debate.
The Obama administration now says it is crafting regulations to allow entry by other victims of domestic violence who feel they have no choice but to flee their homelands to protect themselves.
If adopted, the regulations would mark the first time the federal government formally recognized domestic abuse victims as qualifying for political asylum.

So, the paradigm is simple, the borders are wide open; Islam, give us your poor, your down trodden, the wretched of the earth, which is at least half of their civilization. Truly ,all politics is personal. Now that is slick. I suppose it is more humane than going Roman and killing all their males.